muppetfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Bernie
Pepe was discovered by Bernie too! Pepe mentions that he was discovered by Bernie in this 2007 interview. I'm not sure what ABC news program this is or how to cite it, but thought it was interesting. The interview has lots of other interesting tidbits from Pepe that might be fun to add to his article too if anyone cares. -- Brad D. (talk) 22:21, November 4, 2009 (UTC) two more Why did we take out the Chris Langham and Peter Falk references? — Scott (talk) 03:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC) :They're references to different characters. The "Benny Brillstein" reference belongs on Bernie Brillstein's page, not here. Falk's reference to Kermit's uncle Bernie isn't about an agent. This page is about the unseen agent named Bernie, not a list of every time the name Bernie is used. -- Danny (talk) 09:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC) ::So, are we keeping Bernie the Agent separate because one "Bernie the Agent" is seen, and one "Bernie the Agent" is unseen? — Scott (talk) 15:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC) :::I honestly think we should. Plus there's the fact that Dom's Bernie is a character in The Muppet Movie, positioned as a piece of fiction or at least semi-fiction. The unseen Bernie communicates with characters not just in The Muppet Show but in interviews, print articles, other contexts which posit him as being in the characters "real" backstage lives. The unseen Bernie is *the* agent to the characters; Dom's Bernie is *an* agent. Maybe Peter Falk's Bernie, who is completely hypothetical to begin with, could be a footnote on Brillstein's page, or here. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC) ::::Yeah, it's right to leave out the Yiddish Yodeler and Peter Falk's Bernie, but I see Dom DeLuise's character as the first appearance of Bernie. He's the guy who convinces Kermit to go out into he world and make millions of people happy. Naturally, he looked Bernie up to manage his affairs after he made his deal with Lew Lord, and he's been the agent for the Muppets ever since. — Scott (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC) :::::Ha! I like that, but I still don't think they're identical, leastwise not proven, and organizationally, I think it works better seperately. Maybe it's just me. Because merging, either we have to remove the unseen tag and in fact present it in such a way that it looks like the Bernies are demonstrably the same, or we seperate them, and wind up with multi-categorization. As came up in Talk:Pinocchio, and never really settled, I'm not always sure how I feel about multi-categorized pages the result of mergers, i.e. a character listed as both Muppet and Human or Human and Unseen or References and Characetr Depictions all jumbled up, or Bernie suddenly identified as The Muppet Movie character when we're referring to Bernie the Agent. It just gets awfully messy. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC) ::::::I think it's a possible interpretation, but we don't know if it's the case. I like the way it's written now: "It's unclear whether there's any relationship between the two characters -- or, for that matter, whether any of the Bernies are the same Bernie. Maybe every agent is named Bernie." -- Danny (talk) 16:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC) :::::::See, I think that the Bernies have a lot more in common, for example, than the Mary Louises (who I kind of prefer we separate, while we're talking about it). Also, we don't have to lose the funny parts of the individual articles just because we merge them. Check out Bernie (Sandbox) and let me know what you think. If we go this way, we could categorize it under Human Characters, Muppet Movie Characters, and Unseen Characters. -- Peter (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC) ::::::::True, the Bernies do have more in common, and if you can figure a way to deal with the other Mary Louise outside of bringing back the made-up "Big Mary Louise," go for it. I still hate it this way, especially with the performer box on top. If that's moved, maybe. I still feel like the Bernies are being persecuted, though, forced into a merger. That makes me sad. You anti-agent child of dubious parentage! Plus, categorization issues, which keeping the merged test in sandbox neatly sidesteps. And frankly, even with your qualifiers, the new page *does* more directly suggest that yes, the two Bernies are provably the same (again, performer box is a big deal on that). And I think Bernie's a great unseen character, which if we merge and say "Okay, we're going to consider them the same," is lost. In other words, cheese. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 00:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC) :::::::::OK, so I totally jumped the gun on disambiguating Frazzle, but that's only because I didn't know that we could do it on Frazzle (disambiguation), which I'll change. As for Mary Louise, we can have Mary Louise (old lady) and Mary Louise (little girl). And as for Bernie, I think that there's plenty to suggest that they are, in fact, the same character, even though the ambiuguity is part of the humor, and I think that the combined page is better and more comprehensive than the indibvidual pages. -- Peter (talk) 22:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC) ::::::::::"And as for Bernie, I think that there's plenty to suggest that they are, in fact, the same character." What evidence? Both are agents, both are named Bernie, it's an assumption based on both ignoring the movie within a movie Bernie, and a leap in logic which makes a certain amount of sense, admittedly, but isn't made explicit; it's fanwanking, really and I admit, I think it ruins the joke. There's a Bernie listed here who should also be moved, frankly, Statler's accountant; one could explain that Bernie's moonlighting during the tax crunch, but they're just as likely seperate Bernies. But it seems to be at best two against two, so go ahead. And you've still ignored my whole concerns about categorization. I admit, while I like long pages as much as anyone, it seems to me that lately there's almost a collective obsession with merging and combining pages whenever possible. Some pages don't have any point to them and probably shouldn't have been created to begin with, so a merge can help, or with something like The Countess, many pages kept linking to the wrong one so that served as sort of a collective disambiguation. It didn't try to claim that one Countess is the other and bundle them together. But it seems to me there's plenty of room still to expand on the individual Bernies, even without merging. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 22:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC) :::::::::::No no no. Totally ruins the joke. I think ruining the joke trumps whatever argument Peter is making. The point of "Bernie" is that he's unseen; that's the whole joke of the running gag. To imply that it's a deliberate reference to the DeLuise character is false. -- Danny (talk) 22:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC) Disambiguating I'm looking into disambiguating all the Bernies. So far, we have Abe and Bernie, Bernie (Easter Bunny), Bernie the Agent, and Bernie. I know that it's unclear whether Dom DeLuise's character in The Muppet Movie is the same as the other Bernies, but since they're all agents, I was wondering if we couldn't merge them all into one page. If not, I'm looking for suggestions to retitle this page when Bernie gets turned into a disambiguation page. -- Peter (talk) 18:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC) :How does it look now? It's the same way we handle Dorothy. Which is to say that I don't think we need to go crazy disambiguating when one name is far more prominent than the others. — Scott (talk) 20:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC) ::I don't know about other people's computers, but that text is fuzzy & hard to read for me. -- Danny (talk) :::Looked okay on mine, but I brought it up a bit. — Scott (talk) 21:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC) ::::Looks hard to read to me too. On Wikipedia, it's the same font size and italicized and it looks fine. — Joe (talk) 21:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC) :::::It's really tiny to me. In fact, I think it's more distracting when it's that small. Can we up the size a bit? -- Peter (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC) ::::::I capitalized the first word, and took away the indent -- I think it's less distracting now. What do you guys think? -- Danny (talk) 23:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC) :::::::The size is good, but I think it should be indented so people don't think it's part of the article text. Not sure why this is the one that came to mind, but here's an example from Wikipedia. — Joe (talk) 23:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC) Bernie Brillstein A lot of this is already covered on the Bernie Brillstein page. Just pointing that out. GrantHarding 07:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC) :That's okay. I love redundancy! I really do, I love redundancy. -- Danny Toughpigs 14:54, 23 February 2006 (UTC)